“Normal PVPers” can also go below -5.0, making your whole toxic tear harvesting pretty lame considering you have no idea how sec status works and why any other player besides gankers might have a -5.0 or lower. And thus, they are indeed stuck – which is why they don’t leave lowsec and the gameplay requires neutral alts.
Before you go all condescending, perhaps it should be you paying attention here.
LoL toxic. 
Their gameplay has always required neutral alts anyway, it’s nothing new that people who keep podding in low sec or shoot ships in low sec in general don’t go into high sec much. As a member of an alliance that has this very concept as its ticker, I know a lot of fun stories from when they actually did go into high sec and had to go to great lengths to not embarrass themselves with FacNavy losses.
Not true, they used it in an introduction to EVE video recently - funnily enough, mentioned in one breath with industry and trading as part of the “business for prosperity”.
That would be the Enforcer path. SoF is clearly the PvP path, just look at its AIR achievements.
For those unsure, here is the list of icons: UniWiki:Icons - EVE University Wiki
Note, Outlaw, Flashing Criminal, Flashing Suspect are legal targets, keep your safety green to ensure no mistakes.
Other resources: EVE Online | Academy - Understanding Security Status - YouTube
Folks are reminded of the forum rules:
Negative feedback can be very useful to further improve EVE Online if it is presented in a civil and factual manner. All users are encouraged to honestly express their feelings regarding EVE Online and how it can be improved. Posts that are non-constructive, insulting or in breach of the rules will be deleted regardless of how valid the ideas behind them may be. Users are also reminded that posting with a lack of content also constitutes non-constructive posting.
Pilots are permitted to post chatlogs and kill reports on the EVE Online forums if it adds to and is relevant to ongoing discussion, however this may not be done to flame, troll, insult, shame or bait other corporations other pilots.
Neutral alts is a red herring.
What about the fact that there exists “normal PVPers that are -5.0 and below” and how does that jive with your:
“Normal PVPers use alts” isn’t an out for you, because gankers do the same thing with neutral alts. Ganker docks up in low sec → contracts to neutral alt → alt moves ship to high sec station → contract ship back to ganker. So include or exclude “neutral alts” the fact is you overstepped with the whole “Normal PvPers aren’t -5.0” implication.
Citation needed, this forum alt provides zero evidence.
How about some actual downsides to semi-afk multiboxed resource harvesting.
Apply the Module Stacking Penalty to any second, third, fourth… etc. client window for all active modules and drones 
In a PvP game I’m surprised we don’t yet have that.
Why thank you! From all of me… just trying to get it some traction is all
I disagree, obviously. But here’s why. Take a look at this guy’s income this week… Aryte Vesperia | Character | zKillboard
That’s one player, alt-tabbing between 8-10 pilots in disposable ships. Sure, they’re ganking players who are arguably not playing very well (it would seem). But they’re leveraging all the basic protections to be more or less untouchable (from an input/output perspective).
This guy hasn’t killed me. But I’ve camped his station in ships that can target a pod in 1sec. I can’t touch them, because they’re breaking the existing mechanics…
Between the invulnerability after warp and after undocking. Their pilots can’t be targeted and fired upon between. I realize and respect that this player is highly skilled, and well setup. But in effect, there is no real risk for that style of play, because you can leverage existing mechanics around those consequences.
And this isn’t the only player doing this sort of thing. What I’m saying here is that the risks and the reward for this style of play, at present, are not proportional. Even respecting this player’s skill, which is high. It doesn’t seem well balanced to me.
Just so I understand you correctly:
One person – of whom you acknowledged as highly skilled – is enough to convince you an entire game’s worth of mechanics needs “rebalancing” (which is code to “eliminate their gameplay”), and is your rebuttal of choice against a point about High Sec once having a huge diverse High Sec PVP pirate scene consisting of numerous players of varying skill levels that would can-flip, suspect bait, duel-spam, npc-corp-friendly-fire, fleet-spam, bump, wardec, bounty hunt, and yes gank?
Wow.
You in particular have been quite helpful. Much appreciated
This isn’t about anything that happened to me. I’m only trying to say that the Risk:Reward ratio for the “1-player, 10-pilot ganker, plus one looter” playstyle just doesn’t seem proportional to me.
Genuine question: Have you tried reaping these disproportionately-light-risk rewards by ganking, yourself?
No one that whines about ganking, especially multi-box ganking, has ever tried it. They just want that style of gameplay removed so they can AFK 37 hours a day in perfect safety…
Not really my style…
I’d rather hunt down the “player pirates” - it’s not personal, but seems like a legit reason to play a game like this.
I’ve been trying that for the last few days, and even looked at a couple corps who advertise doing just that… but looking at their logs it doesn’t seem like it’s really feasible. Certainly not to the degree that the other side of that coin is anyways.
Maybe it doesn’t need to be equally easy. It seems like it would be more fun if piracy AND anti-piracy were equally feasible/lucrative. Maybe I’m alone there…
I agree that if you’re AFK you’ve got it coming - 100%.
Anti-ganking is fail because they don’t put the effort into it that gankers do…
You mean downsides like being an easy target? Practically a free-kill? That’s definitely a thing. And it should be. If you’re AFK, you’re kind of asking for it.
That Risk:Reward ratio seems reasonable.
The reason that anti-ganking is not equitable or feasible is rather simple. Gankers gank. That’s what they do, and it’s usually all that they do. They are out and about, scouting, hungry for that next kill. They know where their prey is likely to be 99% of the time. Asteroid belts, ice anomalies, or popular L4 mission running hubs.
Anti-gankers, on the other hand, aren’t quite as organized. They aren’t out and about all day long looking for gankers. They usually have other things going on, and the AG thing is a side activity. They never know where their target is going to be or when they are going to be there. There could be an Orca about to be ganked in one of a thousand ice anomalies scattered across 3,500 systems. But which one, and when? Blinged-out Marauders get ganked every single day in popular mission hubs. But again, which one? And which marauder is about to get it?
That might be true to a point, and I would guess it’s due to the lack of a reward for the efforts. That said, there does seem to be some disparity in “opportunity” as well.
The playstyle I’m talking about here, undocks all 8-10 of their -10 pilots when they have a specific target, obviously spotted by one of their 0+ alts. They warp straight to them and straight back to safety. The window of opportunity to nab them is very tiny - functionally approaching zero. And, even if you do get one, they’re often in disposable ships, so it’s not as lucrative.
Sure - if you happen to be nearby when a gank occurs, you might be able to catch their suspect hauler. That cargo/loot is then subject to the same loss as their piracy-kill was. It just circles back around to the point I was trying to make, which is that I think the Risk:Reward ratio favors player piracy. I just think it should be closer to equal somehow. One way of doing that is increasing the Risk side of that ratio.